Arxiv:2105.11810V2 [Math.FA] 8 Jun 2021 Es Ar Property

Home , Vitali set

arXiv:2105.11810v2 [math.FA] 8 Jun 2021 es ar property. Baire sets, 1.1 Question [ in found paper. this be of can them about facts R oeagbacsrcue ntesttertcpito vie of point set-theoretic the in structures algebraic some ae ai.Acrigy h family the Accordingly, basis. Hamel let Let Introduction 1 aiis aey h family the namely, families; R L eae to related ie onal es subgroup dense countable a Given N htif that view of point set-theoretic the in structure; algebraic The sivratudrteato ftegroup the of action the under invariant is h family The prtos tcnan h collection the contains It operations. ned h no rs.itreto,dffrne n symm and difference, family intersection, the in (resp. union the Indeed, sivratudrteato ftegroup the of action the under invariant is h family the c enti esof sets Bernstein , 0 e od n phrases. and words Key 2010 ( hc r o esrbei h eegesne[ sense Lebesgue the in measurable not are which ( R P LERI TUTRSI H AIYO NON-LEBESGUE OF FAMILY THE IN STRUCTURES ALGEBRAIC R ( R = ) ( ) R , ahmtc ujc Classification. Subject Mathematics Abstract. fst) n hyaeivratudrteato ftegroup the of action Lebesgue the under the invariant are in semigro they measurable being and of not sets), structures of are algebraic have elements sets of which families for sets of noisl.Toesmgop r osrce yuigVita using by constructed are semigroups on Those itself. onto A falsbesof subsets all of +) ) P ⊆ etecleto falsbesof subsets all of collection the be R Q ( eteadtv ru fra ubr noe ihteEuclid the with endowed numbers real of group additive the be L R ae iutnosydffrnl owa xssi h liter the in exists what to differently simultaneously taken R L h osrcino iaislcosi icse nSubse in discussed is selectors Vitali of construction The . c ) L ( ( R ssc that such is R L \ ([ c ( ) ) 14 R nteadtv oooia group topological additive the In osnthv eldfie tutr ntesttertcp set-theoretic the in structure well-defined a have not does ( sa is ) ]) R a eisd rotieof outside or inside be can . ) EUT YGHKAADGAINHAGUMA GRATIEN AND NYAGAHAKWA VENUSTE R ol efidin find we Could falnnLbsu esrbesbesof subsets measurable non-Lebesgue all of eegemauaiiy enti es iaiselectors Vitali sets, Bernstein measurability, Lebesgue swl snnLbsu esrbesbesof subsets measurable non-Lebesgue as well as , σ R agbao eson sets of -algebra aigteLbsu esr eo nadto,tefamily the addition, In zero. measure Lebesgue the having A L L ∈ ( R ESRBESETS MEASURABLE ) ( Q R falLbsu esrbesbesof subsets measurable Lebesgue all of 2 ) of .Tefloigqeto osiue oiaigkey motivating a constitutes question following The ]. B and P rmr 80;Scnay28C10. Secondary 28A05; Primary O ( L ( R ( R c R , ( ) h Φ( R ) +) Φ( a edcmoe notodson non-empty disjoint two into decomposed be can falBrlsbesof subsets Borel all of ) ∈ R R R R let , 1 ufmle of subfamilies ti elkonta hr xs ust of subsets exist there that well-known is It . Φ( n ec ti lsdudralbscset- basic all under closed is it hence and , ) ( ) L R . faltasain of translations all of c , R V ( +) R ) ( Q ) then fra ubr,w osrc families construct we numbers, real of oee,like However, . 8 ) ,[ ], etecleto falVtl selectors Vitali all of collection the be p ie lsdudrfiieunions finite under closed (i.e. ups w? ftefamily the of , 2 h ;frisac,Vtl eetr of selectors Vitali instance, for ]; ( islcosadBrsensets Bernstein and selectors li ti ieec)o w elements two of difference) etric A P Φ( ature. ) ( R R L ∈ es.Teconstructed The sense. ) ) R R faltasain of translations all of containing . swl s h collection the as, well as , ( R L o-eegemeasurable Non-Lebesgue , R ) ( nteohrhand, other the On . R noisl;i means it itself; onto L ction ) R ( h family the , R a oooy and topology, ean R n h family the and , soitdwith associated ) V swell-known. is 2.3 ( ito view. of oint Q ) n more and n have and R L L c ( ( R R ) ) ALGEBRAIC STRUCTURES IN THE FAMILY OF NON-LEBESGUE MEASURABLE SETS 2

n In [11], it was shown that each element of the family 1(Q)= i=1 Vi : Vi (Q), n N of all finite unions of Vitali selectors related to Q, is aV semigroup{ of sets with∈V respect to∈ the} operation of union of sets, and that it is invariant under the actionS of the group Φ(R) such c that (Q) ( 1(Q) ( (R). In addition, the family 2(Q)= 1(Q) 0 := (U M) N : V V L V V ∗N { \ ∪ U 1(Q),M,N 0 was shown to be a semigroup of sets, invariant under the action of ∈V ∈N } c the group Φ(R) and that 1(Q) ( 2(Q) ( (R). A variety of semigroups satisfying these V V L properties were constructed in [12] and [13] by using the collection 1(Q) and different ideal V of sets on R. More general statements related to Vitali selectors generalizing those facts are proved in [16], where in particular, it is shown that each topological group isomorphism of (R, +) onto itself preserves the non-Lebesgue measurability of Vitali selectors of R. Let be the family of all Vitali selectors of R, and let ( ) be the collection of all finite V S V unions of elements of . In [16], it is shown that the family ( ) 0 := (U M) N : U V S V ∗N { \ ∪ ∈ ( ),M,N 0 is an abelian semigroup of sets for which elements are not measurable in S V ∈N } the Lebesgue sense, and that 2(Q) ( ( ) for every countable dense subgroup Q of (R, +). V S V We note that the non-Lebesgue measurability of elements of the family ( ) 0 was also proved in [15], together with other interesting facts about the semigroupsS generatedV ∗N by Vitali selectors and Bernstein sets of R. In addition, it is proved in [16] that the abelian semigroup ( ) 0 has an algebraic structure of being invariant under the action of the group Π(R) S V ∗N of all affine transformations of R onto itself. The families of sets that are not measurable in the Lebesgue sense that are discussed in the literature are constructed by using mostly Vitali selectors of R. In this paper, we consider a more general setting, by looking away for extending Question 1.1. Accordingly, we consider a Bernstein set B which has an algebraic structure of being a subgroup of (R, +). Such a set exists as it is shown in [2]. Furthermore, we consider the collection R/B of all cosets (translates) of B in (R, +), that we denote by for simplicity. Since the family of Bernstein sets is preserved by homeomorphisms [2], it followsB that each element of is also a Bernstein set. B

Question 1.2. Could we ﬁnd in c(R) subfamilies of (R) containing and have some algebraic structures in the set-theoreticL point of view? P B

Through the paper, diﬀerent families of sets answering Question 1.2 are constructed. In n particular, the family ( ) = Bi : Bi , n N of all ﬁnite unions of elements of S B { i=1 ∈ B ∈ } , and its extension ( ) 0 by the 0, constitute an answer to Question 1.2. Consider B S B ∗N S N a new family of sets := V B : V and B . Note that ∅ and V ∨ B { ∪ ∈ V ∈ B} V ⊆V∨B ∅ , where ∅ = and ∅ = . The main aim of the paper is to construct B⊆Vfamilies∨B of sets thatV constituteV∪{∅} answersB toB∪{∅} the following question, which generalizes in some sense Question 1.1 and Question 1.2.

Question 1.3. Could we ﬁnd in c(R) subfamilies of (R) containing the family and have some algebraic structures inL the set-theoretic pointP of view? V ∨ B

In this paper, diﬀerent families of sets having the algebraic structure of being semigroups with respect to the operation of the union of sets, are constructed through the use of and . The constructed semigroups extend the existing ones, and in particular, some containsV B the family ( ) 0. The constructed families also consist of sets that are not measurable in S V ∗N ALGEBRAIC STRUCTURES IN THE FAMILY OF NON-LEBESGUE MEASURABLE SETS 3

the Lebesgue sense, and they are invariant under the action of the group Φ(R). In particular, it is proved that, for any Bernstein sets B1 and B2 having the algebraic structures of being subgroups of (R, +), the family [ ( 1) ( 2) ( )] 0 := [(U1 U2 U3) N] M : S B ∨ S B ∨ S V ∗N { ∪ ∪ \ ∪ U1 ( 1), U2 ( 2), U3 ( ),N,M 0 is an abelian semigroup of sets for which elements∈ S B are not∈ measurable S B ∈ in StheV Lebesgue∈ sense, N } and that it is invariant under the action of the group Φ(R). We point out that [ ( 1) ( 2) ( )] 0 =( ( 1) 0) ( ( 2) 0) S B ∨S B ∨S V ∗N S B ∗N ∨ S B ∗N ∨ ( ( ) 0) and that ( ) 0 [ ∅( 1) ∅( 2) ( )] 0, where ∅( i)= ( i) S V ∗N S V ∗N ⊆ S B ∨ S B ∨ S V ∗N S B S B ∪{∅} for i = 1, 2. The same result holds also when ( ) is replaced by 1(Q) for any countable S V V dense subgroup of (R, +). This paper uses standard notation and facts from Set Theory and Real Analysis, and it is organized as follows: After an introductory section, where motivating ideas and the problem under investigation are developed, the second section deals with the theory of semigroups, the theory of Vitali selectors, and diﬀerent facts about Bernstein sets. The third section concerns the semigroups of non-Lebesgue measurable sets constructed by using Bernstein sets. The fourth section complements the part about Vitali selections developed in the preliminary section, and it is about semigroups of non-Lebesgue measurable sets generated by Vitali selectors. The ﬁfth section is devoted to the semigroups of non-Lebesgue measurable sets that are constructed by using Vitali selectors and Bernstein sets simultaneously.

2 Preliminary facts

2.1 Theory of semigroups and ideals of sets Let be a non-empty set. The set is called a semigroup of sets if there is a binary operation : S for which the associativityS law is satisﬁed; i.e. (x y) z = x (y z) for ∗all x,S ×y, zS −→. S The semigroup is said to be abelian if x y = y x∗ for∗ all x, y ∗ .∗ ∈ S S ∗ ∗ ∈ S For a non-empty set X, let (X be the collection of all subsets of X. Consider a non-empty family of sets (X) suchP that for each pair of elements A, B we have A B . Since the unionS ⊆ of P sets is both commutative and associative, such∈ S a family of sets∪ is∈ anS abelian semigroup with respect to the operation of union of sets.

Deﬁnition 2.1. A non-empty collection of sets (X) is called a semigroup of sets on X if it is closed under ﬁnite unions. If is closedS under ⊆ P countable unions then it is said to be a σ-semigroup of sets on X. S

It is evident that if is a semigroup of sets on X with respect to the operation of union of sets then the collectionS X S : S of all complements of elements of in X, is closed under ﬁnite intersection{ of\ sets, and∈ S} thus, it is a semigroup of sets with respectS to the set-theoretic operation of intersection of sets on X. Recall [7] that a non-empty collection (X) of sets is called an ideal of sets on X if it satisﬁes the following conditions: I ⊆ P (i) If A and B then A B . ∈ I ∈ I ∪ ∈ I (ii) If A and B A then B . ∈ I ⊆ ∈ I ALGEBRAIC STRUCTURES IN THE FAMILY OF NON-LEBESGUE MEASURABLE SETS 4

If the ideal of sets is closed under countable unions of sets then it is called a σ-ideal of sets on X. Clearly,I each ideal of sets is a semigroup of sets which is closed under taking subsets.

Example 2.2 ([12]). If (X) is a non-empty family of sets, consider the collection n A ⊆ P ( ) = i=1 Ai : Ai , n N of all ﬁnite unions of elements of , and consider the ScollectionA { ( )= B ∈A(X):∈ there} is A ( ) such that B A . ItA is clear that family ( ) is aIS semigroupA { of∈ sets, P while the collection∈ S A ( ) is an ideal⊆ of} sets on X. The family S(A) is called the semigroup of sets generated byI A while ( ) is called the ideal of sets SgeneratedA by . Evidently the inclusion ( ) (A) holds,I andA if is a semigroup of sets then ( )=A . S A ⊆ I A A S A A

Example 2.3. Let X be the set R of real numbers. The family f of all ﬁnite subsets of X I is an ideal of sets. The family c of all countable subsets of X is a σ-ideal of sets. The family I b of all bounded subsets of X is an ideal of sets on X. It is clear all these three families are Isemigroups of sets on X.

Remark 2.4. If is a family of sets on X and Y X then collection Y is denoted A ⊆ A∪{ } by Y , and the collection ( ) Y is denoted by Y ( ). It is clear that if Y then A S A ∪{ } S A ∈ A Y = and Y ( )= ( ). If Y = or Y = X then Y ( ) is a semigroup of sets. A A S A S A ∅ S A Let and be any families of subsets of X. Deﬁne a new collection of sets on X by setting A B = (A B1) B2 : A , B1 , B2 . It is clear that if , , and are Afamilies ∗ B of{ sets\ on X∪ such that∈ A ∈, B then∈ B} . ForA anyB familyC ofD sets A ⊆ B C⊆D A∗C⊆B∗D on X, the inclusion always hold. If 1 and 2 are semigroups of sets then A A⊆A∗A S S the family 1 2 does not need to be a semigroup of sets, unless one of them is an ideal of sets. ThisS fact∗ S is shown in the following statement presenting a way of extending a given semigroup by the use of ideals of sets.

Proposition 2.5 ([12]). Let be a semigroup of sets on X and let be an ideal of sets on X. Then the families andS are semigroups of sets on X suchI that . Moreover, ( )=I ∗S andS ∗I( ) = . S ⊆I∗S ⊆S∗I I∗ I ∗ S I ∗ S S ∗ I ∗ I S ∗ I Let and be any families of subsets of X. Deﬁne a new family of sets on X by setting A = AB B : A , B . It is clear that if , , and are families of sets on X Asuch ∨ B that{ ∪ , ∈Athen∈ B} . For anyA B familyC ofD sets on X, the inclusion Aalways ⊆ B C⊆D hold. If A∨C⊆B∨Dis a semigroup of sets on X then A= . The inclusions A⊆A∨A and Ado not need to hold for any familiesA∨Aand Awith or without A⊆A∨B B⊆A∨B A B the assumption of being semigroups. However, the inclusions ∅, ∅ and A⊆A∨B B⊆A ∨ B ∅ always hold. If 1 and 2 are semigroups of sets then the union 1 2 does notA⊆A∨A need to be a semigroup ofS sets, howeverS the following lemma holds. S ∪ S

Lemma 2.6. If 1 and 2 are semigroups of sets on X then the family 1 2 is also a semigroup of setsS on X. S S ∨ S

We observe that for any sets A and B we have A B =(A B) B =(B A) A, then we have and for any families∪ of sets\ ∪ and on\ X.∪ In addition, the equalityA∨B⊆A∗B( ) ( )=A∨B⊆B∗A( ) does not need to hold. A B S A ∪ S B S A ∪ B ALGEBRAIC STRUCTURES IN THE FAMILY OF NON-LEBESGUE MEASURABLE SETS 5

Example 2.7. On the set X = a,b,c,d , let A = a, b , B = b, c and D = c,d , and consider the families = A{ and } = B,D {. Note} that{ } = A, B,{ D}, ( ) = and ( ) = B,D,BA { }D . ItB is clear{ that} ( ) ( )A = ∪ BA,B,D,B{ D} SwhileA ( A )=S BA,B,D,A{ B,∪ A }D, B D, A B DS .A Since∪ S B ={ A B, A ∪D }, we furtherS A ∪ observe B { that ( )∪ ( )∪ = ( ∪ )∪ = ∪A }B, A D,A ∨ A B B{ D∪ , and∪ this} observation motivates theS followingA ∨ S B statement.S A ∨ B { ∪ ∪ ∪ ∪ }

Lemma 2.8. If and are non-empty families of sets on X, then the equality ( )= ( ) ( ) alwaysA holds.B S A ∨ B S A ∨ S B n Proof. Assume that Y ( ). Then Y = i=1 Yi where Yi , i.e. Yi = Ai Bi ∈ S A ∨ B n ∈A∨Bn n ∪ with Ai , Bi and n N. Hence Y = i=1 (Ai Bi)=( i=1 Ai) ( i=1 Bi). Put n∈ A ∈ B n ∈ S ∪ ∪ A = i=1 Ai and B = i=1 Bi. Clearly, A ( ) and B ( ). Hence Y = A B ( ) ( ). ∈S A ∈ S SB S ∪ ∈ S A S∨ S B S Assume that Y ( ) ( ). Then Y = A B where A ( ) and B ( ), i.e. that n ∈ S A ∨m S B ∪ ∈ S A ∈ S B A = i=1 Ai and B = i=1 Bi where Ai and Bi i for some n and m in N. If n = m n ∈A ∈ B then Y = i=1 (Ai Bi) and hence Y ( ). Assume that n = m. Without loosing S ∪ S ∈ S A ∨ B n 6 m of generality, we may assume that n < m. Then Y = [ (Ai Bi)] Bi . For S i=1 ∪ ∪ i=n+1 i = n+1, n+2, , m, put Ai = Ak, where k is some ﬁxed integer in the set 1, 2, , n . It ··· n m Sm S{ ··· } follows that Y = [ i=1 (Ai Bi)] i=n+1(Ai Bi) = i=1 (Ai Bi). Since Ai Bi for i =1, 2, , m, it follows∪ that∪Y ( ∪). ∪ ∪ ∈ A∨B ··· S S∈ S A ∨ B S The following proposition is a generalization of Lemma 2.8 for any ﬁnite collection of families of sets.

Proposition 2.9. Let i be a non-empty family of sets on X, where i = 1, 2, , n, for A n n ··· some n N. Then the equality ( i)= ( i) always holds. ∈ S i=1 A i=1 S A

It follows from Proposition 2.5 thatW the familiesW( 1 2) and ( 1 2) are semigroups S ∨S ∗I I∗ S ∨S of sets for any ideal of sets on X. However, no one of the inclusions 1 ( 1 2) , I S ∗ I ⊆ S ∨ S ∗ I 2 ( 1 2) , 1 ( 1 2) and 2 ( 1 2) needs to hold. S ∗ I ⊆ S ∨ S ∗ I I ∗ S ⊆I∗ S ∨ S I ∗ S ⊆I∗ S ∨ S Example 2.10. Let X be a non-empty set such Card(X) 2, and let A be a non-empty ≥ proper subset of X. Let B = X A. Consider 1 = A, X and 2 = B,X . Consider the \ S { } S { } ideals of = (A) and = (B). It is clear that 1 2 = X , and and A cannot be I P J P S ∨ S { } ∅ elements of ( 1 2) , but and A are elements of 1 . Similarly, the collection 2 S ∨ S ∗ I ∅ S ∗ I S ∗J contains the elements and B, but the family ( 1 2) cannot contain and B. Hence ∅ S ∨ S ∗J ∅ 1 * ( 1 2) , and 2 * ( 1 2) . Note that ( 1 2)= X = ( 1 2). S ∗I S ∨S ∗I S ∗J S ∨S ∗J I∗ S ∨S { } J∗ S ∨S Observe that the collection 2 contains the set B and the collection 2 contains the I ∗ S J ∗ S set A. Hence 2 * ( 1 2) and 2 * ( 1 2). I ∗ S I∗ S ∨ S J ∗ S J ∗ S ∨ S

Proposition 2.11. Let 1 and 2 be semigroups of sets on X. If is an ideal of sets on X S S I then ( 1 2) =( 1 ) ( 2 ) and ( 1 2)=( 1) ( 2). S ∨ S ∗ I S ∗ I ∨ S ∗ I I∗ S ∨ S I ∗ S ∨ I ∗ S

Proof. Assume that A ( 1 2) . Then A = [(S1 S2) I] K where S1 1,S2 2 ∈ S ∨ S ∗ I ∪ \ ∪ ∈ S ∈ S and I,K . It is clear that A =(S1 I) (S2 I) K = [(S1 I) K] [(S2 I) K] ∈ I \ ∪ \ ∪ \ ∪ ∪ \ ∪ ∈ ( 1 ) ( 2 ). S ∗ I ∨ S ∗ I ALGEBRAIC STRUCTURES IN THE FAMILY OF NON-LEBESGUE MEASURABLE SETS 6

Assume that A ( 1 ) ( 2 ). Then A = [(S1 N) L) ((S2 P ) R], where ∈ S ∗ I ∨ S ∗ I \ ∪ ∪ \ ∪ S1 1,S2 1 and N,L,P,R , i = 1, 2. It is clear that A = [(S1 N) L] ∈ S ∈ S ∈ I \ ∪ ∪ [(S2 P ) R]=(S1 N) (S2 P ) (L R). Putting I = L R it follows that \ ∪ c \ c ∪cc \ ∪ ∪c c c c c ∪ c ∈ I c c A = [(S1 N ) (S2 P )] I = [(S1 N ) (S2 P ) ] I = [(S1 N) (S2 P )] c ∩ c ∪ c ∩ c ∪ ∩ c ∩ ∩ ∪c c∪ ∩ ∪ ∪ I = [(S1 S2) (S1 P ) (S2 N) (N P )] I. Put J =(S1 P ) (S2 N) (N P ) ∩ ∪ ∩ c ∪ c ∩c ∪c ∩ ∪ c ∩ ∪ ∩ ∪ ∩ ∈ I and note that A = [(S S ) J ] I = [(S1 S2) J ] I = ((S1 S2) J) I. Since 1 ∩ 2 ∩ ∪ ∪ ∩ ∪ ∪ \ ∪ S1 1,S2 2 and J, I then we have A ( 1 2) . ∈ S ∈ S ∈ I ∈ S ∨ S ∗ I Assume that A ( 1) ( 2). Then A = [I1 U1) W1] [(I2 U2) W2] where ∈ I ∗ S ∨ I ∗ S \ ∪ ∪ \ ∪ I1,I2 , U1, W1 1 and U2, W2 2. It is clear that A = (I1 U1) (I2 U2) ∈ I ∈ S ∈ S \ ∪ \ ∪ (W1 W2) = I (W1 W2), where I = (I1 U1) (I2 U2). Since I it follows that ∪ ∪ ∪ \ ∪ \ ∈ I A = [I (W1 W2)] (W1 W2) ( 1 2). \ ∪ ∪ ∪ ∈I∗ S ∨ S Assume that A ( 1 2). It follows that A = [I (U1 U2)] (W1 W2) where ∈ I∗ S ∨ S \ ∪ ∪ ∪ I , U1, W1 1 and U2, W2 2. Note that A = [(I U2) U1] [(I U1) U2] (W1 ∈ I ∈ S ∈ S \ \ ∪ \ \ ∪ ∪ W2) = [((I U2) U1) W1] [((I U1) U2) W2]. Since the sets I U1 and I U2 are \ \ ∪ ∪ \ \ ∪ \ \ elements of I then we have A ( 1) ( 2). ∈ I ∗ S ∨ I ∗ S

Corollary 2.12. Let 1, 2, , n be a ﬁnite collection of semigroups of sets on X. If is S S ···n S n n n I an ideal of sets on X then ( i) = ( i ) and ( i)= ( i). i=1 S ∗ I i=1 S ∗ I I∗ i=1 S i=1 I ∗ S It follows from Proposition 2.11W that if andW are families of setsW on X, andW is an ideal of sets on X then [( ) ]= [(A ) B( )]. I S A ∨ B ∗ I S A ∗ I ∨ B ∗ I Question 2.13. Let and be families of sets, and let be an ideal of sets. What is the relationship, in theA senseB of inclusion, between the semigroupsI of sets ( ) and [( ) ]? S A ∨ B ∗ I S A ∨ B ∗ I It is clear that if and are semigroups of sets, then ( ) = [( ) ]. The following statementA canB be used in the extension of semigrouS A ∨p B of∗ sets. I ItsS proofA ∨ B is∗ based I on the properties of ideals of sets goes in the same line as Proposition 2.11.

Proposition 2.14. Let 1 and 2 be ideals of sets on X and let be a semigroup of sets on I I S X. Then i ( 1 2)=( 1) ( 2) and i ( 1 2) =( 1 ) ( 2 ) for i =1, S2. ∗I ⊆S∗ I ∨I S ∗I ∨ S ∗I I ∗S ⊆ I ∨I ∗S I ∗S ∨ I ∗S

Corollary 2.15. Let 1, 2, , n be a finite collection of ideals of sets on X. If is a I I ··· I n n n n S semigroup of sets on X then ( i)= ( i), and ( i) = ( i ). S∗ i=1 I i=1 S ∗ I i=1 I ∗ S i=1 I ∗ S 2.2 Lebesgue measurability andW the Baire propertyW W W Recall that the Lebesgue outer measure of a set E R, denoted by µ∗(E), is meant the num- ∗ ∞ ∞ ⊆ ∞ ber µ (E) = inf n=1 ℓ(In): E n=1 In , where inf is taken over all sequences In n=1 consisting of open{ intervals covering⊆ the set} E. The Lebesgue outer measure is defined{ } for all subsets of R butP it is not countablyS additive. A subset E of R is said to be Lebesgue measurable if for each A R, the equality µ∗(E)= µ∗(A E)+ µ∗(A Ec) is satisfied. If E is a Lebesgue measurable⊆ set, then the Lebesgue measure∩ of E is its∩ outer measure, and it is denoted by µ(E). ALGEBRAIC STRUCTURES IN THE FAMILY OF NON-LEBESGUE MEASURABLE SETS 7

Let 0 be the collection of all subsets of R having the Lebesgue measure zero (null subsets N of R). Note that 0 is a σ-ideal of sets on R. The family (R) of all Lebesgue measurable N L sets on R is a σ-algebra of sets on R, containing the collection O(R) of all Borel sets on R c B as well as the collection 0. Let us note that the family (R)= (R) (R) is not empty [5], [2]. N L P \L Recall [7] that if (R) (R) and Ψ(R) is a group of homeomorphisms of R onto itself, O ⊆ P then the family (R) is said to be invariant under the action of Ψ(R), if for each A (R) O ∈ O and for each h Ψ(R), we have h(A) (R). ∈ ∈ O The collection (R) is invariant the action of the group Φ(R) of all translations of R; i.e., if L E (R) and t R then E + t = e + t : e E (R). Furthermore, µ(E + t)= µ(E), ∈L ∈ { ∈ }∈L and if E (R), t R then tE = te : e E (R) and µ(tE)= t µ(E), where t is the ∈L ∈ { ∈ }∈Lc | | | | absolute value of t. Hence the families (R) and (R) are invariant under the action of the L L group Π(R) for which elements are of the form h(x)= ax + b with a, b R and a =0. ∈ 6

Lemma 2.16 ([10]). Let A and B be subsets of R. If A (R) and µ(A∆B)=0 then ∈ L B (R) and µ(A)= µ(B). ∈L

If A a subset of R then Int(A) and Cl(A) are used to denote the interior and the closure of A in R, respectively. A subset M of R is said to be meager (or of first category) if it can be ∞ represented as a countable union of nowhere dense; i.e., M = Mi with Int Cl(Mi) = i=1 ∅ for each i = 1, 2, . It is well known that the collection m of all first category subsets of ··· I S R is a σ-ideal of sets on R and that f c m and f c 0. A subset A of R is I ⊆ I ⊆ I I ⊆ I ⊆ N said to have the Baire property in R if A can be represented as A = O∆M, where O is open in R, M is a first category set on R, and ∆ is the usual operation of standard symmetric difference of sets [8]. The family P (R) of sets having the Baire property in R is a σ-algebra, B containing the collections O(R) and m, and it is invariant under the action of the group B I (R) of all homeomorphisms of R onto itself. H 2.3 Vitali selectors in the additive topological group of real numbers The Vitali selectors of R constitute an example of subsets of R which are not Lebesgue measurable and without the Baire property in R. To define Vitali selectors, we follow [2] and [5], and we emphasize that their existence is granted by the Axiom of Choice. Consider a countable dense subgroup Q of the additive topological group (R, +) of real numbers. Define a relation on R as follows: for x, y R, let x y if and only if x y Q. R ∈ R − ∈ Clearly, is an equivalence relation on R, and hence it divides R into equivalence classes. R Let R/Q = Eα(Q): α I be the collection of all equivalence classes, where I is some { ∈ } indexing set. Accordingly, we have the following decomposition of R:

R = Eα(Q): α I . (2.1) { ∈ } Equality (2.1) implies that Card(I) =[c, where c is the continuum. It follows from the deﬁnition of that the set R/Q consists of disjoint translated copies of Q by elements of R. R Namely, if t Eα(Q) and Eα(Q) R/Q then Eα(Q)= Q + t = q + t : q Q . Hence each ∈ ∈ { ∈ } equivalence class Eα(Q) is a dense subset of R. ALGEBRAIC STRUCTURES IN THE FAMILY OF NON-LEBESGUE MEASURABLE SETS 8

Example 2.17. The set Q of rational numbers, the set D = a + b√2 : a, b 2N , the set { ∈ } Q(γ)= a + bγ : a, b Q for each irrational number γ, and the set √2Q = √2q : q Q { ∈ } { ∈ } are some examples of countable dense subgroups of (R, +).

Deﬁnition 2.18 ([5], [2]). A Vitali selector of R related to Q is any subset V of R containing one element for each equivalence class; i.e. any subset V of R for which Card(V Eα(Q))=1 for each α I. A Vitali selector is called a Vitali set whenever the subgroup∩Q coincides ∈ with the additive group Q of rational numbers.

Proposition 2.19 ([5], [2]). Let Q be a countable dense subgroup of (R, +) and let V be a Vitali selector related to Q. Then the following statements hold:

(i) If q1, q2 Q and q1 = q2 then (V + q1) (V + q2)= . ∈ 6 ∩ ∅ (ii) Any two sets in the collection V + q : q Q are homeomorphic, and { ∈ } R = V + q : q Q . (2.2) { ∈ } [ (iii) The set V is not of the ﬁrst category in R, and it is not a null set.

The following theorem shows that the collection of all Vitali selectors of R is invariant under the action of the group Φ(R) of all translations of R.

n Theorem 2.20 ([11], [16]). If U = i=1 Vi, where each Vi is a Vitali selector related to Qi n n and t R then the set U + t := ( =1 Vi)+ t = =1(Vi + t) is a union of Vitali selectors, ∈ iS i where each Vi + t is related to Qi, for i =1, 2, , n. S ···S It is possible to deﬁne bounded and unbounded Vitali selectors of R. If O is a non-empty open set of R then one can deﬁne Vitali selectors which are dense in O. This implies that there exist Vitali selectors which are dense in R. We further point out that there exists a Vitali selector which contains a perfect set [7], and it can be easily observed that for any Vitali selector V of R the set R V is dense in R. \ Theorem 2.21 ([2], [5]). Any Vitali selector V of R is not measurable in the Lebesgue sense and does not have the Baire property in R.

It follows from Theorem 2.21 that if V be a Vitali selector of R, then every Lebesgue measurable subset of V has the Lebesgue measure zero, and every subset of V with the Baire property is of the ﬁrst category. The next theorem is a more general result on the Baire property than Theorem 2.21. It was stated for Vitali sets, but it is valid even for Vitali selectors of R.

Theorem 2.22 ([14]). Let Vi be a Vitali set for each i n, where n is some integer such n ≤ that n 1. Then the set U = i=1 Vi does not contain the diﬀerence O M, where O is a non-empty≥ open set and M is a meager. In particular, the set U does not\ possess the Baire property in R. S ALGEBRAIC STRUCTURES IN THE FAMILY OF NON-LEBESGUE MEASURABLE SETS 9

A similar result to Theorem 2.22 about non-Lebesgue measurability of ﬁnite unions of Vitali sets, which is valid also for a ﬁnite union of Vitali selectors of R, was proved by A.B. Kharazishvili.

Theorem 2.23 ([1]). If Vα : 1 α m is a non-empty ﬁnite family of Vitali sets, then { ≤ ≤ } the union Vα :1 α m is not measurable in the Lebesgue sense. { ≤ ≤ } S Below, we recall the classical Banach Theorem, and two important lemmas, which were used in the proof of Theorem 2.23, and they will be very useful in the sequel. For, we let b(R) B denotes the family of all bounded subsets of R.

Theorem 2.24 (Banach Theorem [1]). Let be a translation invariant ring of subsets of S R, satisfying the relations b(R) and [0, 1) , and let ϑ : [0, + ) be a ﬁnitely additive translation invariantS ⊆ functional B such that∈ Sϑ([0, 1)) = 1.S Then −→ there∞ exists a ﬁnitely additive translation invariant functional η : b(R) [0, + ) such that η is an extension of ϑ. B −→ ∞

Lemma 2.25 ([1]). Let ϑ be as in Theorem 2.24, and let X b(R) have the following ∈ B property: There exists a bounded inﬁnite sequence hk : k N of elements of R such that { ∈ } the family X + hk : k N is disjoint. If X dom(ϑ) then necessarily ϑ(X)=0. { ∈ } ∈

Lemma 2.26 ([1]). Let X be a bounded subset of a Vitali selector V . Then X has the property indicated in Lemma 2.25.

It follows from Equality 2.2 in Proposition 2.19 that the results of Theorem 2.22 and Theorem 2.23 are not valid for inﬁnite countable unions of Vitali selectors of R. However, the following theorem provides examples of inﬁnite countable unions of Vitali selectors without the Baire property in R.

Theorem 2.27 ([9]). If V is a Vitali selector of R related to Q and Γ is a non-empty proper subset of Q then the set U = V + q : q Γ does not possess the Baire property in R. { ∈ } S Question 2.28. Let V be a Vitali selector of R related to Q and let Γ be an inﬁnite countable proper subset of Q. Under what conditions the set U = V + q : q Γ is not measurable in the Lebesgue sense? { ∈ } S

It is clear that if Q Γ is ﬁnite, then by Theorem 2.23, the set W = V + q : q Q Γ is not measurable in the\ Lebesgue sense. Consequently, by Equality 2.2, the{ set U =∈ V\ +}q : q Γ is also not measurable in the Lebesgue sense. S { ∈ } S We also note [13] that if O is a non-empty open subset of R then there exists a sequence ∞ V1,V2, of (disjoint) Vitali selectors of R such that O = Vi. It is clear that such a { ···} i=1 union is Lebesgue measurable and has the Baire property in R. S ALGEBRAIC STRUCTURES IN THE FAMILY OF NON-LEBESGUE MEASURABLE SETS 10

2.4 Bernstein sets in the additive topological group of real numbers The Bernstein sets on R constitute also an example of elements belonging to the family c(R). According to [2] and [8], a subset B of R is called a Bernstein set if B F = and L ∩ 6 ∅ (R B) F = for each uncountable closed subset of R. The existence and the construction \ ∩ 6 ∅ of Bernstein sets on R is based on the Method of Transﬁnite Recursion. We point out that the same method is used in the construction of Bernstein sets in higher-dimensional Euclidean spaces Rn for n 2. ≥ Proposition 2.29 ([8], [6]). Let B be a Bernstein subset of R. Then the following statements hold. (i) The complement R B of B is also a Bernstein set, and Int(B)= Int(R B)= . \ \ ∅ (ii) Both sets B and R B are dense in R and Card(B)= Card(R B)= c. \ \

The family E(R) of all Bernstein subsets of R is invariant under the action of the group B (R) of all homeomorphisms of R onto itself, i.e. if B E(R) and h (R) then H ∈ B ∈ H h(B) E(R). ∈ B Lemma 2.30 ([8], [6]). Let A be a subset of R. Then A is a Bernstein set if and only if F A = and F A = for every uncountable closed subset of R. ∩ 6 ∅ \ 6 ∅ Theorem 2.31 ([8]). Any Bernstein set B on R is not measurable in the Lebesgue sense and does not have the Baire property. Indeed, every Lebesgue measurable subset of either B or R B has the Lebesgue measure zero, and every subset of either B or R B with the Baire property\ is of the ﬁrst category. \

Corollary 2.32 ([4]). If A is a Lebesgue measurable set with positive measure then the set A B and A B are not measurable in the Lebesgue sense. If A is set with the Baire property which∩ is not of\ the ﬁrst category then the sets A B and A B do not have the Baire property. ∩ \ We point out that there exist Bernstein subsets of R which have some additional algebraic structures for subgroups of the additive group (R, +) as it is indicated in the following statements.

Lemma 2.33 ([2]). There exists a subgroup B of (R, +) such that the factor group R/B is isomorphic to the group (R, +) and B is a Bernstein set in R.

Theorem 2.34 ([2]). There exists two subgroups G1 and G2 of the additive group (R, +) such that G1 G2 = 0 , and both G1 and G2 are Bernstein sets in R. ∩ { } For other notions and facts we refer the reader to [12], [17] and [8].

3 Semigroups of non-Lebesgue measurable sets generated by Bernstein sets Let B be a Bernstein subset of R which has an algebraic structure of being a subgroup of (R, +) as in Lemma 2.33. Consider the collection R/B = B + x : x R of all cosets of B. { ∈ } Without loosing of generality, we may assume that the collection of R/B consists of pairwise ALGEBRAIC STRUCTURES IN THE FAMILY OF NON-LEBESGUE MEASURABLE SETS 11

disjoint sets and we simply denote it by . It is clear that is the collection of all pairwise B B disjoint translates of B by real numbers. It follows from [3] that Card( ) 0, where B ≥ ℵ 0 = Card(N), and Card( ) is the same as the cardinality of the set R Y : Y . Since ℵ B { \ ∈ B} the family E(R) is invariant under the action of the group (R) (in particular, invariant B H under translations), it follows that each element of is also a Bernstein set on R. Let n B ( )= i=1 Bi : Bi , n N be the collection of all ﬁnite unions of elements of , i.e. S(B) is the{ semigroup∈ of B sets∈ generated} by . Evidently, the family ( ) is invariantB under S B B S B the actionS of the group Φ(R).

Lemma 3.1. Each element U in the collection ( ) is a Bernstein set in R. S B n Proof. Assume that U ( ). Then U = Bi, where Bi for i = 1, 2, , n and ∈ S B i=1 ∈ B ··· n N. Let F be an uncountable closed subset of R. Since each Bi is a Bernstein set of ∈ S n R it is evident that F Bi = for each i = 1, 2, , n. Hence F U = F ( i=1 Bi) = n ∩ 6 ∅ ··· ∩ ∩ =1(F Bi) = . i ∩ 6 ∅ S n n SNow, we show that F (R i=1 Bi) = . Accordingly, assume that F (R i=1 Bi)= . So n ∩ \ 6 ∅ ∩ \ ∅ F =1 Bi. Let Bk be an element of for some k / 1, 2, , n . Such an element exists, ⊆ i S B ∈{ ··· } S since Card( ) 0. Since each element of is a Bernstein set then we have F Bk = . S B ≥ ℵ n B n ∩ 6 ∅ By construction Bk ( Bi)= and thus the inclusion F Bi is impossible. Hence ∩ i=1 ∅ ⊆ i=1 U is a Bernstein set on R. This implies that R U is also a Bernstein set. S \ S Corollary 3.2. Each element U of the family ( ), as well as its complement R U, is not S B \ measurable in the Lebesgue sense, and it does not possess the Baire property in R.

Proposition 3.3. The families ( ) 0 and 0 ( ) are semigroups of sets on R such S B ∗N N ∗ S B that ( ) 0 ( ) ( ) 0. They are invariant under the action of the group Φ(R) and theyS B consist⊆N ∗ of S setsB ⊆ which S B are∗N not measurable in the Lebesgue sense.

Proof. The families are semigroups of sets by Proposition 2.5 and the inclusions follow by the same proposition. Let A ( ) 0 and assume that A (R). Then A = (U M) N ∈ S B ∗N ∈L \ ∪ where U ( ) and M, N 0. Note that A U N and U A M and hence A∆U M∈ SNB. It follows that∈µ N(A∆U) µ(M \N)=0⊆ and thus µ\(A∆⊆U)=0. Lemma 2.16 indicates⊆ ∪ that the set U must be measurable≤ ∪ in the Lebesgue sense. However, U is a Bernstein set on R and thus it is not measurable in the Lebesgue sense, hence a contradiction.

The family ( ) 0 is invariant under the action of the group Φ(R) since both families S B ∗N ( ) and 0 are invariant under the action of the group Φ(R), and this ends the proof. S B N n n Proposition 3.4. Let m be the family of all meager subsets of R for n 1. For each nI ≥ element A ( ) m we have 0 dim A n 1, where dim is the Lebesgue covering dimension. ∈ S B ∗ I ≤ ≤ −

Proof. Assume that dim A = n. Then by the Brouwer Dimension Theorem, we must have a non-empty open set O in Rn such that O A = (U M) N, where U ( ) and M, N n ⊆ \ ∪ n ∈ S B meager sets. Since R is a Baire space (i.e. every meager subset of R has an empty interior) then we have Int(M) = Int(N) = . It follows from Proposition 2.29 (i) and Lemma 3.1 ∅ ALGEBRAIC STRUCTURES IN THE FAMILY OF NON-LEBESGUE MEASURABLE SETS 12

that = O Int(A) Int(U M) Int(N) Int(U) Int(N) = = , which is a contradiction.∅ 6 ⊆ ⊆ \ ∪ ⊆ ∪ ∅∪∅ ∅

Lemma 3.5. Let Y be a bounded subset of a Bernstein set A in the collection . Then Y has the property indicated in Lemma 2.25. B

Proof. Let Y be an element of b(R) such that Y is a subset of a Bernstein set A = B ∈ B B +x : x R , where B is a Bernstein subset of R having the property of being a subgroup { ∈ } of (R, +). This means that A = B + x for some x R. Since the family is pairwise ∈ B disjoint, it follows that the family Y + x : x R is also pairwise disjoint. Since every infinite set contains an infinitely countable{ set [18∈], let} Λ be an infinitely countable bounded subset of R. The family xk : xk Λ,k = 1, 2, can play the role of hk : k N in Lemma 2.25. It follows that{ if Y ∈dom(ϑ) then ϑ···}(Y )=0, and this ends the{ proof.∈ } ∈

Proposition 3.6. Let B a Bernstein set of R which has a structure of being a subgroup of (R, +). Any element U of the family ( ) cannot contain any set of positive Lebesgue measure. S B

Proof. Suppose that there exists a Lebesgue measurable subset Y of R such that µ(Y ) > 0 n and Y U. Since U ( ) then U = =1 Bi with Bi for each i = 1, 2, , n. ⊆ ∞ ∈ S B i ∈ B ··· Since Y = n=−∞ (Y [r, r + 1)) and µ(Y ) > 0 implies that µ (Y [r, r + 1)) > 0 for some r, without loss of generality,∩ we may assumeS that the set Y is∩ bounded. Let ϑ be the S restriction of µ to b(R) dom(µ). For this ϑ, there exists a functional η as in Theorem 2.24. Then B ∩

n n

0 < ϑ(Y )= η(Y )= η(Y U)= η Y Bi = η (Y Bi) (3.1) ∩ ∩ ∩ " i=1 !# "i=1 # [ [

Inequality 3.1 implies that η(Y Bi) > 0 for some integer i 1, 2, , n . Since Y Bi ∩ ∈ { ··· } ∩ is a bounded subset of the Bernstein set Bi then it has the property described in Lemma 3.5. According to Lemma 3.5, we must have the equality η(Y Bi)=0, and this is a contradiction. ∩

Corollary 3.7. Let B a Bernstein set of R which has an algebraic structure of being a subgroup of (R, +). Any element of the family ( ) 0 cannot contain any set of positive measure. S B ∗N

Theorem 3.8. Let Uk be an element of ( ) and hk be an element of Φ(R) for k = S Bn 1, 2, , n where n N. Then the set U = hk(Uk) is not measurable in the Lebesgue ··· ∈ k=1 sense and it does not possess the Baire property in R. S

n Proof. It is enough to show that the set U = k=1 hk(Uk) is a Bernstein set on R. Accord- m ingly, we will show that U ( ). Since Uk ( ) i.e. Uk = =1 Bki where Bki ∈ S B S∈ S B i ∈ B S ALGEBRAIC STRUCTURES IN THE FAMILY OF NON-LEBESGUE MEASURABLE SETS 13

then Uk is a Bernstein set by Lemma 3.1. So by the invariance of the family ( ) under the S B action of Φ(R), each set hk(Uk) is also a Bernstein set for each k =1, 2, , n. Note that ··· n n m n m

U = hk(Uk)= hk Bki = hk(Bki) k=1 k=1 i=1 ! k=1 "i=1 # m [ [ [ [ [ Put Bk = hk(Bki). Due to the fact that the family ( ) is invariant under the action i=1 S B of Φ(R), it follows that Bk is an element of ( ). Again, by the invariance of the family S S B n of ( ) under the action of Φ(R), it follows that the set U = k=1 Bk is a ﬁnite union of elementsS B of ( ) and hence U ( ). Lemma 3.1 implies that U is a Bernstein set on S B ∈ S B R and thus it is not measurable in the Lebesgue sense, and itS does not possess the Baire property in R.

Question 3.9. Let Ak be an element of ( ) 0 and hk be a homeomorphism of R for each n S B ∗N k =1, 2, n. Is the union hk(Ak) non-measurable in the Lebesgue sense and without ··· k=1 the Baire property in R? S

Let B1 and B2 be Bernstein sets having an algebraic structure of being subgroups of (R, +) as in Theorem 2.34, and consider the families 1 = B1 +x : x R and 2 = B2 +x : x R B { ∈ } B { ∈ } of all disjoint translates (cosets) of B1 and B2, respectively. Let ( 1) and ( 2) be the S B S B semigroups of sets generated by 1 and 2, respectively. B B

Lemma 3.10. Let B1 and B2 be Bernstein sets having an algebraic structure of being subgroups of (R, +), and consider the sets U1 ( 1) and U2 ( 2). Then the set U = U1 U2 cannot contain any subset of positive measure.∈ S B ∈ S B ∪

Proof. Assume that there exists a Lebesgue measurable set Y such that µ(Y ) > 0 and n m Y U1 U2, where U1 = i=1 B1i and U2 = k=1 B2k with B1i 1 and B2k 2. Without loss⊆ of generality∪ we may assume, we may assume that the set Y∈is B bounded.∈ It B follows from S S n+m Proposition 3.6 that the set Y cannot lie entirely in U1 nor in U2. Write U = i=1 Xi where Xi = B1i for i =1, 2, , n and Xn+k = B2k for k =1, 2, , m. Accordingly, we have ··· ··· S

n+m n+m

0 <µ(Y )= µ(Y U)= µ (Y Xi) µ(Y Xi). (3.2) ∩ " i=1 ∩ # ≤ i=1 ∩ [ X Inequality 3.2 implies that that µ(Y Xi) > 0 for some index i 1, 2, , n + m . Since ∩ ∈{ ··· } Y Xi b(R), let ϑ be the restriction of µ to b(R) dom(µ). For this ϑ, there exists a ∩ ∈ B B ∩ functional η as in Theorem 2.24 which is an extension of ϑ. It follows that 0 <µ(Y Xi)= ∩ ϑ(Y Xi) = η(Y Xi). If Xi 1 then we must have η(Y Xi)=0 by Lemma 3.5. ∩ ∩ ∈ B ∩ Similarly, if Xi 2 we must have η(Y Xi)=0 by Lemma 3.5. We conclude that the set Y cannot exists∈ and B this ends the proof.∩

Theorem 3.11. The family ( 1) ( 2) is a semigroup of sets on R which consists of S B ∨ S B non-Lebesgue measurable sets and it is invariant under the action of the group Φ(R).

Proof. The family ( 1) ( 2) is a semigroup by Lemma 2.6. Let U ( 1) ( 2) S B ∨ S B ∈ S B ∨ S B and assume that U is a Lebesgue measurable set. Then U = U1 U2 where U1 ( 1) ∪ ∈ S B ALGEBRAIC STRUCTURES IN THE FAMILY OF NON-LEBESGUE MEASURABLE SETS 14

and U2 ( 2). Since U1 and U2 are Bernstein sets by Lemma 3.1 then µ(U) = 0. But the inequality∈ S Bµ(U) > 0 is also impossible by Lemma 3.10. It follows that the set6 U is not Lebesgue measurable. It is evident that for any h Φ(R) we have h(U) = h(U1 U2) = ∈ ∪ h(U1) h(U2) ( 1) ( 2), due to the fact that both families ( 1) and ( 2) are ∪ ∈ S B ∨ S B S B S B invariant under the action of the group Φ(R).

Corollary 3.12. If A ( 1) ( 2) then dim A =0, where dim is the Lebesgue covering dimension. ∈ S B ∨ S B

Proof. Assume that there is an element A in ( 1) ( 2) such that dim A =1. It follows S B ∨ S B from the Brouwer Dimension Theorem that there exists an open set O = in R such that O A. For such an open set, it must have a positive Lebesgue measure,6 which∅ contradicts Lemma⊆ 3.10.

Theorem 3.13. The families 0 ( ( 1) ( 2)) and ( ( 1) ( 2)) 0 are semigroups N ∗ S B ∨ S B S B ∨ S B ∗N of sets on R such that ( 1) ( 2) 0 ( ( 1) ( 2)) ( ( 1) ( 2)) 0. They S B ∨ S B ⊆N ∗ S B ∨ S B ⊆ S B ∨ S B ∗N are invariant under the action of the group Φ(R) and they consist of sets which are not measurable in the Lebesgue sense.

Proof. The families are semigroups by Proposition 2.5. The inclusions follow from the same proposition. The invariance of the family ( ( 1) ( 2)) 0 under the action of the group S B ∨ S B ∗N Φ(R) follows from Theorem 3.11 and the fact that the collection 0 is invariant under the N action of the group Φ(R). The proof that each element of the family ( ( 1) ( 2)) 0 is not measurable in the Lebesgue sense goes in the same line as in PropositionS B ∨ S 3.3B taking∗N into consideration Theorem 3.11.

It follows from Proposition 2.11 and Lemma 2.8 that ( 1 2) 0 =( ( 1) ( 2)) 0 = S B ∨B ∗N S B ∨ S B ∗N ( ( 1) 0) ( ( 2) 0). We also note that ( 1) ( 1) ∅( 2) and ( 2) S B ∗N ∨ S B ∗N S B ⊆ S B ∨ S B S B ⊆ ∅( 1) ( 2) and ( i) 0 ( ( i) 0) ( ∅( j) 0) for i, j =1, 2 with i = j. Both S B ∨ S B S B ∗N ⊆ S B ∗N ∨ S B ∗N 6 of these semigroups consist also non-Lebesgue measurable subsets of R.

The family ( 1) ( 1) does not need to be a semigroup of sets, but the following statement shows thatS itB consists∗S B of elements which are not measurable in the Lebesgue sense.

Corollary 3.14. Each element of the family ( 1) ( 2) is not measurable in the Lebesgue sense. S B ∗S B

Proof. Let A ( 1) ( 2) and assume that A is a Lebesgue measurable set. Note that ∈ S B ∗ S B A = (U1 U2) U3 for some U1 ( 1) and U2, U3 ( 2). Since U3 is Bernstein set and \ ∪ ∈ S B ∈ S B U3 A then the set A cannot have the Lebesgue measure zero. Assume that µ(A) > 0. It ⊆ follows that A = (U1 U2) U3 U1 U3 ( 1) ( 2), which is in contradiction with Lemma 3.10. \ ∪ ⊆ ∪ ∈ S B ∨ S B

Corollary 3.15. The families 0 ( ( 1) ( 2)) and ( ( 1) ( 2)) 0 consist of elements which are not measurableN in∗ theS B Lebesgue∗ S B sense. S B ∗ S B ∗ N ALGEBRAIC STRUCTURES IN THE FAMILY OF NON-LEBESGUE MEASURABLE SETS 15

Note that ( 1) ( 2) ( 1) ( 2) and ( 1) ( 2) ( 2) ( 1). Furthermore S B ∨ S B ⊆ S B ∗ S B S B ∨ S B ⊆ S B ∗ S B 0 ( ( 1) ( 2)) 0 ( ( 1) ( 2)) and ( ( 1) ( 2)) 0 ( ( 1) ( 2)) N ∗ S B ∨ S B ⊆N ∗ S B ∗ S B S B ∨ S B ∗N ⊆ S B ∗ S B ∗ 0. N

Question 3.16. Is each element U in the families ( 1) ( 2) and ( 1) ( 2) without S B ∨ S B S B ∗ S B the Baire property in R?

4 Semigroups of non-Lebesgue measurable sets generated by Vitali selectors Let be the family of all countable dense subgroups of (R, +). The following statement showsC that each ﬁnite union of Vitali selectors is not measurable in the Lebesgue sense and it generalizes Theorem 2.23.

n Theorem 4.1 ([16]). Let U = i=1 Vi be a ﬁnite union of Vitali selectors of R, where Vi (Qi) and each Qi is a an element of for i = 1, 2, , n. Then the set U is not measurable∈ V in the Lebesgue sense.S C ···

For n =2, Theorem 4.1 implies the following statement.

Corollary 4.2. Suppose that V1 and V2 are Vitali selectors related to elements Q1 and Q2 respectively in . Then atleast one of the sets V1 V2,V2 V1 and V1 V2 must be a non measurable setC in the Lebesgue sense. \ \ ∩

Proof. It follows from Theorem 4.1 that the set V1 V2 is not measurable in the Lebesgue ∪ sense. Note that V1 V2 =(V1 V2) (V2 V1) (V1 V2) and sets in this union are disjoint. ∪ \ ∪ \ ∪ ∩ If all the sets in this union are Lebesgue measurable, then the set V1 V2 will be a Lebesgue measurable set, and this will be a contradiction. ∪

A result similar to Theorem 4.1 also holds in the case of the Baire property as it can be found in [12]. If Q then we denote by (Q) the family of all Vitali selectors related ∈ C V to Q, and 1(Q) the semigroup generated by (Q). The following statement shows that V V each topological group isomorphism maps Vitali selectors of R to Vitali selectors of R, not necessarily related to the same subgroups of (R, +).

Theorem 4.3 ([16]). Let Q be a countable dense subgroup (R, +) and let V (Q). If ∈ V h : (R, +) (R, +) is a topological group isomorphism then P = h(Q) and W = h(V ) (P−→). ∈ C ∈V

Let Q1 and Q2 be elements of such that Q1 Q2 and Q1 = Q2. It was shown in [13] that C ⊆ 6 if Card(Q2/Q1) < then 1(Q1) 1(Q2) and 1(Q1) = 1(Q2), and if Card(Q2/Q1)= 0 ∞ V ⊆V V 6 V ℵ then 1(Q1) 1(Q2)= . From here, we consider the collection = V : V (Q), Q V ∩V ∅ V {n ∈V ∈ C} of all Vitali selectors of R, and we deﬁne the semigroup ( ) = Vi : Vi , n N S V { i=1 ∈ V ∈ } generated by the collection of all Vitali selectors of (R, +). Clearly, (Q) ( and V S V V 1(Q) ( ( ) for each Q . It is well known [12] that the families ( ), m ( ) and V S V ∈ C S V I ∗ S V ( ) m consist of sets without the Baire property and they are invariant under the action S V ∗ I of Φ(R). ALGEBRAIC STRUCTURES IN THE FAMILY OF NON-LEBESGUE MEASURABLE SETS 16

Theorem 4.4 ([16]). The families 0 ( ) and ( ) 0 are semigroups of sets on N ∗ S V S V ∗ N R, for which elements are not measurable in the Lebesgue sense, such that ( ) ( 0 S V N ∗ ( ) ( ( ) 0, and they are invariant under the action of the group Π(R) of all aﬃne S V S V ∗N transformations of R onto itself.

The following theorem is a more general result than Theorem 4.1.

n Theorem 4.5. Let U = Vi be a ﬁnite union of Vitali selectors of R, where Vi (Qi) i=1 ∈V and each Qi is an element of for i =1, 2, , n. Then the set U cannot contain any subset of positive Lebesgue measure.S C ···

Proof. Suppose that there exists a Lebesgue measurable subset Y of R such that µ(Y ) > 0 and Y U. Without loss of generality, we may assume that the set Y is bounded. Let ϑ be ⊆ the restriction of µ to b(R) dom(µ). For this ϑ, there exists a functional η as in Theorem 2.24. Clearly, we haveB ∩ n n

0 < ϑ(Y )= η(Y )= η(Y U)= η Y Vi = η (Y Vi) (4.1) ∩ ∩ ∩ " i=1 !# "i=1 # [ [

Inequality 4.1 implies that η(Y Vi) > 0 for some index i 1, 2, , n . Since Y Vi ∩ ∈ { ··· } ∩ is a bounded subset of the Vitali selector Vi, it follows from Lemma 2.26 that it has the property described in Lemma 2.25. According to Lemma 2.25, we must have the equality η(Y Vi)=0, but this a contradiction. We conclude that the set U cannot contain any Lebesgue∩ measurable set with positive measure.

It is important to point out that Theorem 4.5 is not valid in the case of countable unions of Vitali selectors. A simple way to observe this fact, is to consider Equality 2.2, but a more general result was proved in [13], where it was shown that if O is a non-empty open subset ∞ of R then there exist a sequence of Vitali selectors V1,V2, such that O = i=1 Vi. Such a union contains a set of positive measure. ··· S

Corollary 4.6. No element of the family ( ) 0 can contain any set of positive Lebesgue measure. S V ∗N

With the help of Theorem 4.5, we can prove the following statement.

n Corollary 4.7. Let Uk = Vik be a finite union of Vitali selectors of R, where Vik i=1 ∈ (Qk) and Qk is an element of for each k, and let hk be a topological group isomorphism of V S C m (R, +) onto itself, for each k =1, 2, , n. Then the union U = k=1 hk(Uk) cannot contain any Lebesgue measurable set of positive··· measure. S Proof. By Theorem 4.5, it is enough to show that U is a finite union of Vitali selectors of R. n n Note that hk(Uk)= hk ( i=1 Vik)= i=1 hk (Vik). By Theorem 4.3, the set hk(Vik) is a Vitali selector related to the group hk(Qk) . Hence hk(Uk) is a finite union of Vitali selectors. m S Sm∈ C n It follows that U = k=1 hk(Uk)= k=1 i=1 hk(Vik) is also a finite union of Vitali selectors of R. S S S ALGEBRAIC STRUCTURES IN THE FAMILY OF NON-LEBESGUE MEASURABLE SETS 17

5 Semigroups of non-Lebesgue measurable sets generated by Bernstein sets and Vitali selectors simultaneously We now combine Bernstein sets and Vitali selectors of R, to construct families of sets for which elements are not measurable in the Lebesgue sense.

Theorem 5.1. Let B a Bernstein set of R which has an algebraic structure of being a subgroup of (R, +), and let ( ) be the semigroup generated by the collection all Vitali S V V selectors of R. Any union U = U1 U2, where U1 ( ) and U2 ( ), cannot contain any subset of positive Lebesgue measure.∪ ∈ S B ∈ S V

Proof. Assume that there exists a Lebesgue measurable set Y such that µ(Y ) > 0 and Y U = U1 U2. Without loss of generality we may assume, we may assume that the set Y ⊆is bounded.∪ It follows from Proposition 3.6 and Theorem 4.5 that the set Y cannot lie n+m entirely in U1 nor in U2. Write U = Xi where Xi = Bi for i = 1, 2, , n and i=1 ∈ B ··· Xi = Vi for i = n +1, n +2, , n + m. Then ∈V ··· S n+m n+m

0 <µ(Y )= µ(Y U)= µ (Y Xi) µ(Y Xi). (5.1) ∩ " i=1 ∩ # ≤ i=1 ∩ [ X It follows from Inequality 5.1 that µ(Y Xi) > 0 for some index i 1, 2, , n + m . Since ∩ ∈{ ··· } Y Xi b(R), let ϑ be the restriction of µ on b(R) dom(µ). For this ϑ there exists a ∩ ∈ B B ∩ functional η as in Theorem 2.24 which is an extension of ϑ. So we have 0 < µ(Y Xi = ∩ ϑ(Y Xi)= η(Y Xi). If Xi is an element of then η(Y Xi)=0 by Lemma 2.26. If Xi ∩ ∩ V ∩ is an element of then η(Y Xi)=0 by Lemma 3.5. As a conclusion the set Y cannot set exist. B ∩

Corollary 5.2. Let B a Bernstein set of R which has an algebraic structure of being a subgroup of (R, +), and let ( ) be the semigroup generated by the collection all Vitali S V V selectors of R. Then the semigroup ( ) ( ) consists of sets which are not measurable S B ∨ S V in the Lebesgue sense, and it is invariant under the action of the group Φ(R).

Proof. Assume that there exists a Lebesgue measurable set U in ( ) ( ). Then U = n S B ∨ S V U1 U2 where U1 ( ) and U2 ( ). Since U2 = Vi where Vi (Qi), let Vk be ∪ ∈ S B ∈ S V i=1 ∈ V a ﬁxed Vitali selector in this union such that Vk (Qk). Since R = Vk + q : q Qk ∈ V S { ∈ } and Vk U2 U then we have R = U + q : q Qk . Given that µ(U + q)= µ(U) and ⊆ ⊆ { ∈ } µ(R) > 0 then we must have µ(U) > 0, and this contradicts Theorem 5.1S. S Since the family ( ) is invariant under the action of the group Π(R) and the family ( ) S V S B invariant under the action of the group Φ(R), it follows that the family ( ) ( ) is S B ∨ S V invariant under the action of the group Φ(R).

Corollary 5.3. Each element of the family ( ) ( ) is not measurable in the Lebesgue sense. S B ∗ S V

Proof. Let A ( ) ( ) and assume that A is a Lebesgue measurable set.Then A = ∈ S B ∗ S V (U1 U2) U3 for some U1 ( ) and U2, U3 ( ). Since U3 is a ﬁnite union of Vitali \ ∪ ∈ S B ∈ S V selectors and U3 A the set A cannot have the Lebesgue measure zero. Assume that ⊆ ALGEBRAIC STRUCTURES IN THE FAMILY OF NON-LEBESGUE MEASURABLE SETS 18

µ(A) > 0. It follows that A =(U1 U2) U3 U1 U3 ( 1) ( ), which contradicts Theorem 5.1. \ ∪ ⊆ ∪ ∈ S B ∨ S V

Theorem 5.4. The families ( ) ( ), 0 ( ( ) ( )) and ( ( ) ( )) 0 are S V ∨ S B N ∗ S V ∨ S B S V ∨ S B ∗N semigroups of sets on R satisfying the inclusions ( ) ( ) 0 ( ( ) ( )) S V ∨ S B ⊆ N ∗ S V ∨ S B ⊆ ( ( ) ( )) 0. They are invariant under the action of the group Φ(R) and they consist ofS setsV ∨ which S B are∗N not measurable in the Lebesgue sense.

Proof. The given families are semigroups of sets by Proposition 2.5, and the inclusions follow from the same statement. Let A ( ( ) ( )) 0 and assume that A is measurable in the ∈ S V ∨ S B ∗N Lebesgue sense. Then A = ((U1 U2) M) N, where U1 ( ), U2 ( ) and M, N 0. ∪ \ ∪ ∈ S V ∈ S B ∈N Note that A (U1 U2) N and (U1 U2) A M and hence A∆(U1 U2) M N. \ ∪ ⊆ ∪ \ ⊆ ∪ ⊆ ∪ It follows that µ(A∆(U1 U2) µ(M N)=0 and thus µ(A∆(U1 U2)=0. It follows ∪ ≤ ∪ ∪ from Lemma 2.16 that the set U1 U2 must be measurable in the Lebesgue sense. But ∪ the set U1 U1 is not measurable in the Lebesgue sense by Corollary 5.2, and this is a contradiction.∪

Let us note that ( ) ( ) ( ) ( ) and ( ( ) ( )) 0 ( ( ) ( )) 0. S B ∨ S V ⊆ S B ∗ S V S B ∨ S V ∗N ⊆ S B ∗ S V ∗N It follows from Proposition 2.11 and Lemma 2.8 that ( ) 0 =( ( ) ( )) 0 = S B∨V ∗N S V ∨ S B ∗N ( ( ) 0) ( ( ) 0). We also note that ( ) ( ) ∅( ), ( ) ∅( ) ( ), S V ∗N ∨ S B ∗N S B ⊆ S B ∨ S V S V ⊆ S B ∨ S V ( ) 0 ( ( ) 0) ( ∅( ) 0) and ( ) 0 ( ( ∅) 0) ( ( ) 0). These SsemigroupsB ∗N ⊆ consistS B ∗N of sets∨ whichS V are∗N not measurableS V ∗N in⊆ theS LeBbesgue∗N sense.∨ S V ∗N

Corollary 5.5. The families 0 ( ( ) ( )) and ( ( ) ( )) 0 consist of elements which are not measurable in theN Lebesgue∗ S B ∗ sense. S V S B ∗ S V ∗N

Question 5.6. Is each element of the families ( ) ( ) and ( ) ( ) without the S B ∨ S V S B ∗ S V Baire property in R?

The positive answer to Question 5.6 will imply that the semigroups of sets ( ) ( ), m S V ∨S B I ∗ ( ( ) ( )) and ( ( ) ( )) m, which are invariant under the action of the group S V ∨ S B S V ∨ S B ∗ I Φ(R), consist of sets without the Baire property in R.

Lemma 5.7. Let B1 and B2 be Bernstein of R having the algebraic structures of being subgroups of (R, +), and let ( ) be the semigroup generated by all Vitali selectors of R. S V Then any union U = U1 U2 U3, where U1 ( 1), U2 ( 3) and U3 ( ) cannot ∪ ∪ ∈ S B ∈ S B ∈ S V contains any set of positive measure. In particular, the family ( 1) ( 2) ( ) is a semigroup of sets for which elements are not measurable in theS LebesgueB ∨ S B sense,∨ S andV it is invariant under the action of the group Φ(R).

Proof. To prove that the element U cannot contain any set of positive measure, we proceed as in Theorem 5.1. It is clear that the family ( 1) ( 2) ( ) is a semigroup of sets by S B ∨ S B ∨ S V Lemma 2.6. The family is invariant under the action of the group Φ(R), since both families ( 1), ( 2) and ( ) are invariant under the action of the group Φ(R). S B S B S V The following statement can be proved in a similar way as Theorem 5.4 by taking into account Lemma 5.7. ALGEBRAIC STRUCTURES IN THE FAMILY OF NON-LEBESGUE MEASURABLE SETS 19

Theorem 5.8. Let B1 and B2 be Bernstein sets of R having an algebraic structures of being subgroups of (R, +), and let ( ) be the semigroup generated by all Vitali selectors of R. Then S V the families ( 1) ( 2) ( ), 0 ( ( 1) ( 2) ( )) and ( ( 1) ( 2) ( )) 0 S B ∨S B ∨S V N ∗ S B ∨S B ∨S V S B ∨S B ∨S V ∗N are semigroups of sets on R such that ( 1) ( 2) ( ) 0 ( ( 1) ( 2) ( )) S B ∨S B ∨S V ⊆N ∗ S B ∨S B ∨S V ⊆ ( ( 1) ( 2) ( )) 0. They are invariant under the action of the group Φ(R) and theyS B consist∨ S B of sets∨ S thatV are∗N not measurable in the Lebesgue sense.

It follows from Proposition 2.11 and Lemma 2.8 that ( 1 2 ) 0 = ( ( 1) S B ∨ B ∨ V ∗ N S B ∨ ( 2) ( )) 0 =( ( 1) 0) ( ( 2) 0) ( ( ) 0). We also note that ( i) S B ∨ S V ∗N S B ∗N ∨ S B ∗N ∨ S V ∗N S B ⊆ ( i) ∅( j) ∅( ) for i, j =1, 2 with i = j. Furthermore, ( i) 0 ( ( i) 0) S B ∨ S B ∨ S V 6 S B ∗N ⊆ S B ∗N ∨ ( ∅( j) 0) ( ∅( ) 0) and ( ) 0 ( ∅( i) 0) ( ∅( j) 0) ( ( ) 0). AllS theseB ∗N semigroups∨ S V consist∗N of setsS whichV ∗N are⊆ notS measurablB ∗N e∨ inS theB Lebesgue∗N ∨ sense.S V All∗N the statements proved in which the σ-ideal 0 is involved, they are even valid for any subideal N of 0. We also note that those statements are valid when the family ( ) is replaced by I N S V 1(Q) for any countable dense subset Q of (R, +). V Acknowledgements We would like to thank Prof. A. B Kharazishvili for the helpful information about Vitali selectors that he provided. We would like also to thank the referee for his (her) valuable comments and advice.

References

[1] A.B. Kharazishvili, Measurability properties of Vitali sets, Amer. Math. Monthly., 118 8 (2011), 693 - 703. [2] A.B. Kharazishvili, Nonmeasurable sets and functions, Vol.195, Elsevier, 2004. [3] A.B. Kharazishvili, Transformations groups and invariant measures: Set-theoretical aspects, World scientific publishing Co.Pte.Ltd, 1998. [4] G. L. Wise, Counterexamples in probability and real analysis, Oxford University Press, Inc., 1993. [5] G. Vitali, Sul problema della misura dei gruppi di punti di una retta, Bologna, 1905. [6] I. Tsereteli, Topological finiteness, Bernstein sets, and topological rigidity, Topology and its applica- tions, 159 (2012), 1645 - 1653. [7] J.C. Morgan II, Point set theory, Taylor & Francis Group, LLC., 1990. [8] J.C. Oxtoby, Measure and Category: Graduate texts in mathematics, Springer-Verlag, New York, Helderberg, Berlin, 1971. [9] M. Aigner, V. A. Chatyrko and V. Nyagahakwa, On countable families of sets without the Baire property, Colloq. Math., 133, 2 (2013), 179–187. [10] M.Capiński and E. Kopp, Measure, integral and probability, Springer-Verlag, 1998. [11] V.A. Chatyrko and V. Nyagahakwa, On the families of sets without the Baire property generated by the Vitali sets, p-Adic Numbers Ultrametric Anal. Appl., 3 2 (2011), 100–107. [12] V.A. Chatyrko and V. Nyagahakwa, The algebra of semigroups of sets, Math. Scand., 116, 2 (2015), 161–170. [13] V. A. Chatyrko and V. Nyagahakwa, Vitali selectors in topological groups and related semigroups of sets, Questions Answers Gen. Topology., 33 2 (2015), 93–102. [14] V. A. Chatyrko, On countable unions of non-meager sets in hereditary Lindelöf spaces, p-Adic Num- bers Ultrametric Anal. Appl.,3 1 2011, 1–6. [15] V. A. Chatyrko, Semigroups of pathological sets, Georgian Math. J. ,26 4(1019), 515-528. [16] V. Nyagahakwa and G. Haguma, Non-Lebesgue measurability of finite unions of Vitali selectors related to different groups, accepted for publication in Math. Scand., 2021. [17] V. Nyagahakwa, Families of sets without the Baire property, Linköping University, 2017. [18] S. Lang, Mathematical analysis, Addison -Wesley Publishing Company, 1969. ALGEBRAIC STRUCTURES IN THE FAMILY OF NON-LEBESGUE MEASURABLE SETS 20

Department of Mathematics, University of RWANDA, PO. Box 3900, Kigali, Rwanda Email address: [email protected]